Last updated: September 29, 2026 at 8:42 AM UTC
All 891 Vulnerability 357 Breach 144 Threat 383 Defense 7
Tag: prompt-injection (27 articles)Clear

Sandbox escapes in Cursor, Codex, Gemini CLI, and Antigravity let agents run code

Researchers at Pillar Security demonstrated sandbox escapes across four widely used AI coding agents: Cursor, OpenAI Codex CLI, Google Gemini CLI, and Antigravity. In nearly every case the agent never broke the sandbox directly; it only had to write a file that a trusted component outside the sandbox would later run, load, or scan. Failure modes included hook abuse, editing a virtual environment interpreter the editor then ran itself, planting Git metadata outside a .git folder to fire execution through fsmonitor, and a command allowlist that trusted a tool by name while the real invocation was not read only. Prompt injection in workspace content was the trigger.

Check
Update Cursor to 3.0.0 or later and Codex CLI to 0.95.0 or later, then check whether coding agents can reach a Docker socket or other privileged local daemon.
Affected
Developers running AI coding agents on untrusted repositories; prompt injection in workspace content can make the agent write files that trusted tools outside the sandbox later execute, defeating the sandbox.
Fix
Patch the affected agents, treat repository content as untrusted input, keep privileged daemons and sockets out of agent reach, and do not rely on a workspace sandbox as your only boundary.

New attack makes AI agents treat attacker data as trusted content

Researchers described Agent Data Injection, a new twist on prompt-injection attacks against AI agents. Rather than smuggling in fake instructions, it exploits the weak separation between trusted and untrusted data so that attacker-supplied content is mistaken for the agent's own trusted data, using deliberately ambiguous delimiters the model misreads. In tests against web and coding agents, this let an attacker steer an agent's clicks or actions, succeeding up to half the time even against defenses that block ordinary instruction injection. Some approaches helped: tagging page elements with random, unguessable identifiers roughly halved success, while strict tracking of where data came from stopped it but sharply reduced how many tasks agents completed.

Check
Review where AI agents in your environment consume untrusted content such as web pages, tickets, or logs, and check whether they clearly separate that data from trusted instructions and internal state.
Affected
Users and organizations running web or coding AI agents that act on external content; attackers can craft data the agent treats as trusted, steering its actions past defenses built for instruction injection.
Fix
Prefer agents that isolate and label untrusted data, use unguessable identifiers for page elements, track data provenance where feasible, keep a human in the loop for sensitive actions, and weigh usability costs.

MemGhost plants lasting false memories in AI assistants through a single email

Researchers demonstrated MemGhost, an attack that uses one email to plant a false, persistent memory in an AI personal assistant with inbox access. Because these assistants keep notes about the user and reload them every session, a crafted message can trick the agent into saving a fabricated fact while keeping its reply innocuous, so the tampering goes unnoticed and steers later answers. The team trained an attacker model to write such emails automatically, reporting high success against open-source and commercial agents and showing it transfers across memory backends and survives several defenses. Unlike earlier one-shot injection that leaked data only in the moment, MemGhost's memory persists long after the email is gone.

Check
Review whether AI assistants in use have persistent memory and can read untrusted content, and check what controls govern what gets written to memory and whether changes are visible to the user.
Affected
Users of AI personal assistants with persistent memory and inbox access; a single crafted email can silently write a false memory that biases the assistant's answers across future sessions.
Fix
Prefer assistants that log and let users review memory changes, restrict what untrusted content can write to long-term memory, isolate memory from email-triggered actions, and periodically audit stored agent memories.

Ghostcommit hides secret-stealing instructions inside images to slip past AI reviewers

Researchers at the ASSET Research Group demonstrated Ghostcommit, an attack that hides malicious instructions inside a PNG image so AI code reviewers miss them entirely. A harmless-looking conventions file points the coding agent to the image, whose rendered text tells the agent to read the repository's .env file and encode its secrets as a list of numbers written into the code. Because tools like CodeRabbit and Bugbot skip image files by default, the pull request passes review clean; the trap springs later when a developer asks the agent for an unrelated task. The outcome depended on the tool wrapping the model: some agents leaked secrets, while Claude Code refused.

Check
Review how your AI code reviewers and coding agents handle images and convention files like AGENTS.md, and check whether reviewers inspect image contents rather than skipping them as opaque binary files.
Affected
Teams using AI code reviewers that skip images and coding agents that auto-follow repository convention files; a merged pull request can later drive an agent to read .env and leak its secrets.
Fix
Configure AI reviewers to inspect image contents, treat convention files and repo content as untrusted input, keep secrets out of agents' reach, and require human review before agents read sensitive files.

A single GitHub issue can trick AI workflows into leaking private repository data

Researchers at Noma Labs showed that GitHub's new Agentic Workflows, which let an AI agent read issues and act on repositories automatically, can be tricked into leaking private code through nothing more than a public issue. The technique, GitLost, is indirect prompt injection: an attacker opens an ordinary-looking issue in an organization's public repository, buries plain-English instructions in it, and the agent, which often holds a token with read access across the org's repositories, follows them, fetches files from a private repo, and posts the contents in a public comment. No credentials, coding, or write access are needed. GitHub was notified, but researchers frame it as an architectural weakness.

Check
Review any GitHub Agentic Workflows or similar AI automations, and check whether their agents hold organization-wide or cross-repository read tokens while also processing untrusted content like public issues and pull requests.
Affected
Organizations using GitHub Agentic Workflows where the agent has broad cross-repository read access and reacts to public issues; an attacker can steer it into leaking private repository contents with one crafted issue.
Fix
Scope agent tokens to only the repositories a workflow needs, keep agents reading untrusted input away from private data, restrict which events trigger automation, and require human review before agents post publicly.

Hidden website prompts trick AI agents into sending cryptocurrency to attackers

Zscaler found attackers using search-engine poisoning and hidden instructions on malicious websites to manipulate AI agents into making cryptocurrency payments. In one case, a hidden element on the page tells an AI agent that it must "resolve an error" by completing a payment, alongside code that starts a crypto transfer to a hardcoded wallet; the same page also shows human visitors ordinary payment options. Another campaign typosquats a decentralized-finance portfolio tracker and uses hidden prompts to convince agents the fake site is the real one. The attacker is seeding the scheme through several GitHub repositories, showing how autonomous agents that browse and act can be steered by content they read.

Check
Review any AI agents that can browse the web and initiate payments, and check what guardrails, approvals, or spending limits sit between an agent reading a web page and moving money.
Affected
Users and organizations running autonomous AI agents that can browse and make payments; hidden instructions on poisoned or typosquatted websites can redirect the agent into sending cryptocurrency to an attacker's wallet.
Fix
Require human approval for agent-initiated payments, isolate untrusted web content from action-taking, apply spending limits and allowlisted destinations, and treat everything an agent reads online as untrusted rather than as instructions.

Cursor flaws let a poisoned prompt escape the AI coding sandbox and run commands

Researchers at Cato AI Labs detailed two flaws, dubbed DuneSlide, in the AI code editor Cursor that let a prompt-injection attack break out of the sandbox Cursor uses to contain the commands its agent runs. The attacker never types anything: they plant instructions in content the agent reads on the user's behalf, such as a connected MCP service or a web page. One flaw abuses a working-directory setting to get an attacker path added to the allowed-write list, letting injected commands overwrite the sandbox helper itself and then run with no sandbox. Both are rated 9.8 and are fixed in Cursor 3.0; every earlier version is affected, so users should update.

Check
Confirm Cursor is updated to 3.0 or later on developer machines, and review whether your AI coding agents can be steered by content they read from MCP servers, web pages, or repositories.
Affected
Developers running Cursor versions before 3.0 (CVE-2026-50548 and CVE-2026-50549); a prompt injection hidden in content the agent reads can escape the command sandbox and run arbitrary commands on the machine.
Fix
Update Cursor to 3.0 or later, keep the agent's command sandbox enabled, and treat everything an AI coding agent reads, from MCP tools to web pages, as potentially hostile rather than trusted.

Microsoft warns poisoned MCP tool descriptions can make AI agents leak data

Microsoft is warning that attackers can hijack AI agents through poisoned tool descriptions, the plain-text notes that tell an agent what a tool does. Because agents connect to systems through the Model Context Protocol and read these descriptions to decide how to act, an attacker who updates a trusted third-party tool can bury a hidden instruction in its description, telling the agent to quietly collect and exfiltrate data on its next task. Many setups pick up description changes without re-approval, so the poisoned version goes live silently. Each step the agent takes looks legitimate and runs with the user's own permissions, so no alarm fires.

Check
Inventory the MCP tools and servers your AI agents can use, especially third-party ones, and check whether your setup re-approves or reviews tool descriptions when they change rather than trusting updates automatically.
Affected
Organizations running AI agents connected to third-party MCP tools without re-approval on description changes; a poisoned description can redirect the agent to exfiltrate data using the user's own permissions, invisibly.
Fix
Require review when tool descriptions change, pin and verify tool sources, scope agents with least privilege, log every tool invocation at the infrastructure layer, and gate sensitive actions behind human approval.

BioShocking attack convinces AI browsers they are in a game, then steals credentials

Researchers at LayerX detailed BioShocking, an attack that manipulates AI browser agents into ignoring their safety rules by convincing them they are inside a fictional game. Using a web page with a puzzle that rewards deliberately wrong answers, the attack gets the agent to accept a false reality, after which it treats a request to open a page and copy its contents as just another step. In the demonstration, that page redirected to the victim's work GitHub repository and the agent handed over SSH credentials, treating the theft as finishing the game. None of the six AI browser agents tested flagged it as a rule violation.

Check
Review where AI browser agents are used and what logged-in accounts they can reach, and test whether an agent follows instructions from web content telling it the normal rules no longer apply.
Affected
Users of AI browser agents that act on logged-in sessions; an attacker-controlled page can trick the agent into ignoring its rules and stealing credentials or data from sites the user uses.
Fix
Require user confirmation before an agent reads from logged-in accounts, limit which sites and data agents can touch, and prefer AI browsers that flag when content tries to override their instructions.

DPRK macOS malware Gaslight plants fake errors to derail AI-assisted analysis

SentinelOne detailed Gaslight, a Rust-based macOS backdoor and information stealer tied with high confidence to North Korea, whose standout trick targets the analyst rather than the sandbox. The sample embeds a block of 38 fabricated "system" messages, formatted to mimic the prompt scaffolding of an AI triage assistant, that try to make an LLM-assisted analysis tool doubt its session and abort, truncate, or refuse the analysis. Beyond that, Gaslight steals browser data, Keychain secrets, and command history, using a Telegram bot for command and control and self-redacting its bot token from its own output. It is an early example of malware built to weaponize the AI tools now common in reverse engineering.

Check
If you use AI or LLM tools in malware triage, review whether sample contents are passed to the model as trusted input, and check macOS hosts for the Telegram-based persistence described.
Affected
macOS users targeted by this North Korea-linked stealer, and analysts whose AI-assisted triage pipelines can be manipulated when malicious sample text is fed to the model as if it were instructions.
Fix
Treat the contents of analyzed samples as adversarial input, never as instructions, and isolate hostile text from AI models. On endpoints, hunt for the published indicators and suspicious com.apple-style LaunchAgents.